Friday, 1 February 2013

Equality, adoption and public benefit

This post was first published in Scotland's great new online LGBT magazine Mosaic which was launched today. Do take a look. It's packed with interesting features and voices.

Adoption is
in the news on both sides of the border at the moment. Down south the story is
a warning to local authorities from the Government – improve your performance
or we’ll enforce outsourcing. In Scotland it’s about St Margaret’s Children and
Family Care Society and the treatment of same sex prospective adopters.

​In
fact the two stories relate to the same thing – how can we ensure that children
waiting to be adopted are placed with parents in good time? And one way of
doing that is to broaden the pool of available adopters out there.

I’m writing
here in a personal capacity, but I’m also chair of Scottish Adoption, one of
only four voluntary adoption agencies in Scotland. St Margaret’s is one of the
other three, and one of two originally established as Catholic agencies. I’m a
Catholic gay man who is adopted so it’s an issue I’ve thought a lot about.

St
Margaret’s objection to being tied by the law is not news in the adoption
world. What is new is a ruling from the Office of the Scottish Charity
Regulator (OSCR) in response to a complaint from the National Secular Society.
St Margaret’s preferred criteria is to prioritise couples who have been married
for at least two years.

​Marriage
is not an option for same sex couples – yet. As a charity, St Margaret’s is
obliged to provide public benefit and OSCR’s response to the complaint is that
the benefits provided by the agency are ‘unduly restricted’ and create a
‘disbenefit’ to same sex couples.

St Margaret’s is taking legal advice. The Education
Secretary, Mike Russell, has said he is ‘disappointed’ by the regulator's
decision and that the consequences are not in the best interests of the
children St Margaret’s helps. He’s due to meet with the agency to discuss the
best way forward.

The row is
another manifestation of the tension between religious freedom and equality
following recent European Court rulings. I think the European Court got it
right. I don’t think people should be prevented from wearing religious symbols
at work, health and safety permitting.

​But
I do think that when they’re providing a public service they can’t be allowed
to pick and choose who they work with. If you want that choice, the job
obviously isn’t for you. It’s not a case of the rights of LGBT people trumping
those with religious faith either. Many LGBT people are people of faith too.

And in this
instance I don’t think St. Margaret’s or any other agency should be able to
pick and choose who gets to adopt for any other reason than the best interests
of children. The sexuality of prospective adopters clearly doesn’t meet that
test.

​The
Catholic Church establishment may not like the law, but an organisation which
benefits from charitable status must provide public benefit in return. And it
shouldn’t be allowed to discriminate about the receipt that benefit.

I don’t want
St Margaret’s to disappear. This isn’t because I think it would
prevent Catholic parents from adopting. They are free to go to other agencies,
though it’s important that all agencies also consider the interests of a child
who may grow up to be lesbian, gay or bisexual. But it would be unfortunate to
lose the expertise of one of a handful of specialist voluntary adoption
agencies.

​Adoption is
challenging and complex for everyone involved and the interests of children
needing to be adopted are best served by a plurality of agencies. It’s for that
reason I really hope talks succeed. But they shouldn’t do so at the expense of
equality.